Posted on 05/25/2015 6:58:54 AM PDT by marshmallow
The Archdiocese of Washington and Priests for Life suffered a legal setback at the D.C. Court of Appeals that puts their case on a path to the U.S. Supreme Court.
WASHINGTON — A majority of judges on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals this week rejected a request from the Archdiocese of Washington and Priests for Life to have the full court review their challenge to the Health and Human Services’ contraceptive mandate.
According to the archdiocese and Priests for Life, the mandate as it currently applies forces them to be complicit in the provision of contraceptive services, including abortifacient drugs that seriously violate their Catholic beliefs.
“We concluded that the regulation challenged in this case does not, as a matter of law or fact, give plaintiffs’ conduct the contraception-facilitating effect of which they complain,” stated the majority ruling, written by Judge Nina Pillard, in denying relief from the mandate under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
The 6-3 ruling was followed by two strenuous dissents, one from Judge Janice Rodgers Brown, joined by Judge Karen Henderson, and one form Judge Brett Kavanaugh, which agreed with the plaintiffs’ contention that the federal government’s “accommodation” still violates the religious liberty of the Catholic organizations.
(Excerpt) Read more at ncregister.com ...
Even the Catholic position comes from a highly pro-life construal of the classic Judeo-Christian scriptures. They shouldn’t be penalized by a sane government for obeying them.
Yes, you are correct. God is the true arbiter of justice, He will have the final say.
Sounds like this is headed for the Supreme Court!
Before they take that step, religious organizations should simply fire all of their “civilian” employees.
Heretofore the USSC has been fairly friendly to such claims, but if modern trends continue it may not always be. Enforcing the ramifications of “gay marriage” will harden its heart.
Meanwhile Muslims may be exempted from Obama care ..
IMHO, what supports the progressive left and their social engineering schemes are unbacked, printed, Federal Reserve money and its fake interest rates. It has allowed $18 Trillion in government debt (and rising daily), which funds every scheme from Obamacare to ACORN. Access to fake money allows even conservative politicians to avoid making difficult choices - and the state rolls on.
Maybe we can get rid of it without a Civil War. I don't know.
That is the most sensible move. Let it be a church ministry staffed with church Catholics (and analogous moves be made by evangelical ministries).
The plaintiffs have to pay for it. I guess that is not enough of a nexus to convince some judges that there is a nexus.
I know, I know: under the Obama accommodation, it is true that the plaintiffs don't have to pay for an insurance policy containing contraceptives as a stated benefit. Instead they have to pay exactly the same price for a policy which is silent on contraceptive benefits, with said benefits, as a matter of law, being provided "free" by the insurance company. I guess you have to go to an elite law school to perceive a difference.
Paging His Emminence Cardinal Dola, who cut the deal with his Obamaness and then sold it to the flock.
N. DolaN.
Why is mandatory contraception participation a part of healthcare to start with? But your own damn contraceptives.
Oh, all those civilians will know immediately that they are out of a job, when these religious institutions shut their doors. That means all religious schools, hospitals, and everything else that is religious. Then let these “FOOLS” in the DC government tell their people what they’ll do to replace all of the ones they have shut down.
No, you’re not a slow learner. You are like a lot of us: It’s very sobering to admit that so many of our fellow citizens are hostile to the dream that was the United States, and that they are in fact traitors. So, we try not to believe it.
bfl
These lower courts keep ignoring the rulings of the Supreme Court on these issues.
If I was a Supreme, I would be pissed off.
If an issue has already been decided, if there something the Court can do to rule on a case without hearing it?
So difficult to understand:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
It's all a matter of what the meaning of "is" is and since it's just about sex, don't worry about it.
Besides, after teaching that contraception was a sin for over four hundred years all the non-Catholic "Christian" churches changed their mind, said that God changed His mind, and now don't really care anyway.
Look at the huge demonstrations and protests against this. That tells you all you really need to know about how much US "Christians" (Catholic and non-Catholic alike) actually care about the First Amendment protection for freedom of religion. US "Christians" care about economics, not about Christianity. They'll roll over and play dead whenever the USSC says they should. As long as the "invisible hand" is free to keep fisting the middle class it's all good.
JMHo
Indeed. They readily lay the yoke of statism upon the shoulders of the peons while demanding exemption for themselves.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.